Category: Law Enforcement

Repeal the Second Amendment

Repeal the second amendment! I know that is an inflammatory statement, and maybe unpopular, too, but I need to put it out there.

It would be the ultimate irony if we made progress on gun control after Charlie Kirk’s assassination. My heart does go out to his family, and all those affected by gun violence. Charlie Kirk, though, does not deserve martyrdom. He did a great deal of damage, bringing a message of intolerance and divisiveness to young people on college campuses. I watched a number of videos of him espousing his beliefs. In some instances, I actually agreed with his point (I don’t think Cardi B is a great role model). However, even in those instances, he did it in a disrespectful, one-sided way. I don’t think Britney Spears or Madonna were great role models for little girls either – and for the same reason. We shouldn’t be sexualizing young girls. Why focus only on a Black star? But that isn’t my point, it is just illustrative of the problem with how Kirk approached things. His racism ran deep, and he was oblivious to his privilege. He shouldn’t be lionized in death.

Now back to my main point: we should repeal the second amendment. I welcome arguments to the contrary, but please don’t bother explaining the meaning of the second amendment to me – whether it was intended only for militias or individuals. I don’t care what our forefathers intended, just as I wouldn’t accept the argument that because our forefathers tolerated (supported? profited from? believed in? were indifferent to? – pick your verb) slavery, holds no water today. We know better. We should know better about guns.

For those who require guns to hunt, to protect livestock, to protect us, we can make provisions in law; we can set up mechanisms to allow for that. But, we have to let go of the notion that owning a gun is a God-given right. Some of us don’t believe in God, for one thing, but that aside, even if we can all agree in a common morality –  like ‘thou shall not kill’ – I don’t understand how that morality includes gun ownership.

The Bill of Rights protects our freedom. How do guns protect our freedom? I could more effectively argue that owning a car is more connected to being free in this country than having a gun. We don’t believe that owning a car is a God-given right. Someone explain to me, in the context of the world we live in now, how possessing a gun enhances your freedom, or is essential to your freedom.

Somewhere along the line we got things twisted in this country. There may have been a time when settling the ‘wild west’ or living a pioneer life, folks needed guns for their survival. That time has passed. As time went on, though, the gun became symbolic of something else (of rugged individualism, of strength, of masculinity…) – not just a tool to hunt or even to protect oneself. If we have gotten to the point where every man, woman and child needs a gun to protect themselves, we are lost.  

Most Democrats are not willing to say that the second amendment should be repealed. The attachment to guns is too strong, the gun lobby is too powerful (still! – despite the fact that the NRA has been discredited). I believe we need to be bolder. If we start from the presumption that we don’t have a God-given or forefather-given right to have a gun, so much becomes possible. We can still have shooting ranges. People can still hunt, though unless you hunt for food, I don’t understand the pleasure in that – but that is just me. Police and other security-related people can be armed. But it can all be regulated. And, it moves the question of regular folks having automatic weapons off the table – we wouldn’t need a special law to prohibit it. Think how much simpler it would be – we wouldn’t have to argue about what the second amendment actually means! We’d save millions of dollars in litigation costs.

I understand how freedom of speech, assembly, press and religion relate to freedom. It is a direct connection to the way we live our lives. I get why we have the Bill of Rights. Those activities are central, crucial to our liberty. It is not a slippery slope if we were to remove the second amendment. The right to bear arms has not made us more free and won’t make us more free. Hasn’t that point been made again and again over the last 25 years!?

I believe the exact opposite of what Charlie Kirk espoused. The second amendment is not worth the loss of life we as a country have endured. The rate of gun violence is too high a price to pay for the right to bear arms.

VOTE!!!

Early voting has begun in New York State. Let me direct. If you are a resident of this great state, I am asking you to vote for Kathy Hochul. We are being bombarded by ads, paid for by the Republican National Committee or another Republican political action committee, playing on fear of crime to get folks to vote for Lee Zeldin. I ask that you consider the facts. Has the crime rate gone up? The answer to that is: it depends – compared to when? What types of crimes? Where? Here is a chart (using FBI data) that illustrates that New York State’s crime rate is far below that of the United States as a whole and that it is far less than it was nine years ago. (New York is in blue, the United States is red – this is the most current available)

It is all about perception. I looked at current New York City data and again it depends on what you compare. Murder is down year over year. Auto theft is up this year compared to last. But, again, it is all relative because compared to five years ago, when crime was at historic lows, it has gone up. If you compare it to a decade ago, it is substantially lower.

No matter what your perception of crime is, what exactly are Republicans proposing to do about it that will make it better? There is no evidence that whatever increases we have seen are the result of ‘cashless bail.’ If the only solution to this perceived crime wave is to repeal cashless bail, it will not have the desired effect.

There was a reason the state adopted cashless bail and that reason has not gone away. We can’t have a system where persons who commit the same crime are treated differently because one has access to money, and another does not. One person can’t languish in jail while another walks free based only on one having access to cash. The current law may need to be adjusted, if there are loopholes or if aspects of it that aren’t working. In fact, it already has been amended. But, we should not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

The criminal justice system is flawed. We need to acknowledge the problems and not pretend that we can go back to some ‘good old days.’ There are no good old days when it comes to crime. I don’t have all the answers. I am not advocating defunding the police – neither is Kathy Hochul. It is a ridiculous notion, we need police. At the same time, though, we need to be honest about the problems inherent in the system. Beware of any candidate who offers simplistic solutions, on either end of the spectrum (from defunding the police to ‘lock ‘em up’). I appreciate that Kathy Hochul, despite the onslaught of these hyperbolic crime commercials, has not called for repeal of cashless bail. She has a spine – a necessary quality in a public servant.

I also believe that New York State has many other issues to grapple with. The more I hear of Lee Zeldin’s positions the more concerned I become. He is advocating lifting the ban on fracking. Again, this might sound appealing in the short term, but it would be a disastrous policy for the environmental health of our state. He advocates public funding for religious schools. This is another dangerous policy that in the long term threatens the very heart of our system of governance. We need to firmly re-establish the separation of church (synagogue, mosque or any other religious institution) and state. That separation is especially critical in education.

Since I wrote my blog post several weeks ago asking that you not be complacent,  the race for governor in New York has tightened. I believe the fear-mongering and relentless advertising is having an impact.

It is essential that we be vigilant – and not just at the gubernatorial level.  The same strategy of fear-mongering is at play in House of Representatives races. In my home district, the Republican candidate, Liz Joy, is portraying her opponent as soft on crime. The law that everyone is criticizing was enacted at the state-level, not federal. The incumbent Congressman, Paul Tonko, had no role in the move to cashless bail. Tonko has voted for the assault weapon ban and every other common-sense approach to crime reduction offered at the federal level.

Once again, I appeal to all to look beyond facile slogans and the relentless fear-mongering. Make sure you are getting your information from reliable sources. When applicable, look at the candidates actual voting record.

As a reminder, here are some of the bills Lee Zeldin voted against as a congressman:

Assault Weapons Ban (ironically, most in law enforcement support this), Inflation Reduction Act (but he takes credit for infrastructure projects and issues press releases to encourage federal spending in his district), Right to Contraception, Ensuring Access to Abortion, Women’s Health Protection Act, Infant Formula Supplemental Appropriations Act, Consumer Price Gouging…the list can go on and on. These bills were not part of some crazy liberal agenda – they are responses to problems and needs that most New Yorkers support.

Zeldin has downplayed the potential for rolling-back abortion access in New York State, despite his ‘pro-life’ stance, noting the Democratic majorities in both houses of the State Legislature. Please do not rely on that – the composition of the legislature can change (and has many times in my lifetime) and the governor has powers through budgeting and executive orders that can circumvent the legislature.

Finally, Zeldin’s close association with Trump is problematic, and it should be disqualifying. We in New York have seen Trump’s career – his multiple bankruptcies, his failures, his lies – up close. We know he is a charlatan. Somehow Zeldin overlooks all of that and refuses to hold Trump accountable for the damage done to our country. This alone makes him unfit to be governor.

I urge everyone to do their homework on the candidates (for all offices). Don’t rely on advertisements. Read their own words; look at their positions; if they have a voting record, check it out. And then vote – it matters.

Why Violence?

Night and day (Photo on left: AP/Alex Brandon; Photo on right: AP/Seth Wenig)

I watch with horror the violence and destruction that seems to accompany peaceful protest. I admire the protesters, the ‘wall of moms,’ and believe they are acting in good faith. Who is to blame for the fact that it devolves into riot? Is it because the response by the police and ‘troopers,’ (from whatever Federal agency they may come – which is another troubling issue) are so aggressive? Is it troublemakers who seize an opportunity? Is it both? Who is benefitting from the chaos? And, is it really chaos? How much violence and destruction is there really? These days, when where you get your information makes such a difference in your reality, it is hard to know what to believe.

I have attended a number of protests in my life. Gary and I went to Washington D.C. for the Women’s March. I’ve gone to several Planned Parenthood demonstrations. I went to show support for our local Jewish Community Center after it had been targeted with anti-Semitic bomb threats. All of them were peaceful. None of them were held at night. Something seems to change at night. Why?

I continue to reflect on the role that law enforcement plays in our society. I wrote about it previously here. I have been thinking about my own experiences. I am my father’s daughter and that means that I have an instinctive negative reaction to authority figures – at least those who are heavy-handed. Dad left the Air Force as soon as he could; the culture of taking orders without question wasn’t a good fit.

Fortunately, I have had minimal interactions with police officers, other than a few speeding tickets. The blaring siren, the lights flashing in your rearview mirror and the realization that it is directed at me gets the adrenaline flowing full force, even though I know that I haven’t done anything seriously wrong. I have been envious of friends who have been able to sweet talk their way out the ticket. I don’t have that skill set. On those rare occasions when I have been stopped, I try to curb that instinctive resentment (sometimes not that successfully), minimize the interaction, obey their direction, and move on.

Once back in the late ‘80s, Gary and I were pulled over in Brooklyn. We were heading to a friend for Sunday brunch and wanted to pick up a cake or pie, so we were looking for a bakery or grocery store in an unfamiliar neighborhood. As a result, Gary was driving a little erratically – stopping and starting, pulling over to the side to see if shops were open. Next thing we know, we hear the siren from a patrol car and look back to see we were being flagged down. After the police officer explained why he stopped us, we understood his concern, but the officer was more than a little rude and condescending in questioning us. Gary was very respectful (more than I would have been capable of being), explaining what we were looking for, producing his driver’s license and registration. When the interaction was over, we breathed a sigh of relief. We agreed that the cop seemed to take pleasure in his power trip, he enjoyed seeing us quaking in our boots.

On the other hand, we had a positive experience with a state trooper in Pennsylvania. Our car broke down and we managed to pull over on the shoulder of the highway. It was cold and damp out. Within minutes a patrol car arrived. The trooper radioed for assistance and let us sit in his warm, dry car until the AAA tow truck came. We took the trooper’s name and Gary wrote a letter to the state police to thank him for his service.

In both of those instances, we did not fear for our lives. The two interactions were very different, but even in the case of the unpleasant police officer, we weren’t concerned that we would be arrested, abused or killed. I would not have labeled it as ‘white privilege’ at the time, but we both recognize it as such now.

My feelings about the police includes quite a range of emotion, including fear, respect, resentment and appreciation. I guess it depends on the circumstances.

Many years ago, when we lived in the city of Albany, we heard screaming coming from our neighbor’s house. Our house was set on higher ground so we could see into the apartment, the curtains were not drawn. Upon hearing the sounds of distress, I looked out our bedroom window and saw a woman being chased by a man from one room to another. I waited a minute or two to see if things calmed down. They didn’t – I thought she was in danger. I didn’t know the couple despite the fact that they lived next door. I called 911. Fortunately, they responded quickly, and it appeared that they successfully deescalated the situation. I was grateful to be able to call upon them. The incident was never repeated.

As far as I know, that was a success story. I know it doesn’t always go that way. The couple, by the way, were Black. That scenario raises a lot of questions. Is that the role of the police? Who would I have called if the police were no longer assigned that responsibility?  I suppose there could be another service, but what would that look like? There are so many unknowns in a situation like that. The man or woman could have had a gun; mental illness or drugs/alcohol could have had a role. Whoever responded to the call wouldn’t know what they were walking into.

I guess that is one of the problems at the root of this. We don’t know what we are dealing with and the situation can evolve. A peaceful protest may be proceeding without incident until it isn’t. A loud argument between people can turn violent. I attended a training for school resource officers several years ago where one of the presenters explained that police are taught to gain control of the situation – their mindset is to shut things down and get the upper hand. While that strategy makes sense in one way, in another it may be counterproductive, especially when someone is angry or desperate and wants to be heard.

It is clear to me that law enforcement needs to improve its ability to deescalate rather than inflame. In the meanwhile, as protest continues and may even be spreading, I pray it can happen without destruction, injuries or deaths.